I'm not moving the goalposts anywhere. Passers win in this league. Newton is clearly the superior passer.

Again, this season was a lot of fun, but this is a league where quarterbacks have to be proficient throwing the football. Winning in the manner Denver did this season is not sustainable, no matter what "winning" argument you throw at it.

They always hedge their bets, setting up their excuse in advance in case Tebow trolls them.

"What? I said if he improved he would be better!"

I have to admit, it made me just a little bit happier each time we won while Tebow threw for less than 50% (MIA, OAK, KC, NYJ, PIT) because I knew it was driving a certain segment of Bronco fans crazy.

No, they don't say that even a little bit. This is clearly too complicated for you. Sagarin is an unbiased, completely objective computer/mathematical model. It takes several factors into account, one of them being SOS. But SOS isn't the only factor. Margin of victory, for example, is also included.

So to clarify (i.e. "dumb down") for you, jhns, just because Denver's SOS is higher, and W/L is better, the model won't necessarily rank Denver higher. I know this is hard for you to wrap your little head around.

No, they don't say that even a little bit. This is clearly too complicated for you. Sagarin is an unbiased, completely objective computer/mathematical model. It takes several factors into account, one of them being SOS. But SOS isn't the only factor. Margin of victory, for example, is also included.

So to clarify (i.e. "dumb down") for you, jhns, just because Denver's SOS is higher, and W/L is better, the model won't necessarily rank Denver higher. I know this is hard for you to wrap your little head around.

Yeah! Winning more games with a harder schedule is clear proof that you are worse!

No, they don't say that even a little bit. This is clearly too complicated for you. Sagarin is an unbiased, completely objective computer/mathematical model. It takes several factors into account, one of them being SOS. But SOS isn't the only factor. Margin of victory, for example, is also included.

So to clarify (i.e. "dumb down") for you, jhns, just because Denver's SOS is higher, and W/L is better, the model won't necessarily rank Denver higher. I know this is hard for you to wrap your little head around.

So . . . . . Denver won more games than Carolina, with a worse team, against a harder schedule . . . . . but science sez Tebow was not good. Does not compute.

So you're saying that because Tebow won more games with a worse team against better opponents, Cam is better. That is brilliant. No really, you are a genius.

Dear god you're stupid. Where do you come up with this crap? I never even remotely suggested any such thing. Do I think Newton is "better"? Yes, I do. But to I get there using the ridiculous trail of "logic" you used above? Um, no. But I don't expect much understanding of this from a guy who's laughably stupid enough to think that half the GM's in the league would take Tebow over Newton as you've suggested. What a dope.

So . . . . . Denver won more games than Carolina, with a worse team, against a harder schedule . . . . . but science sez Tebow was not good. Does not compute.

It doesn't compute for some of you people because you think the QB is/was the only factor. Which only proves that you're all out of your depth in this discussion. There's no point in even arguing with any of you.

It doesn't compute for some of you people because you think the QB is/was the only factor. Which only proves that you're all out of your depth in this discussion. There's no point in even arguing with any of you.

Harder schedule + more wins = worse team. You argue this as you call others stupid...

It doesn't compute for some of you people because you think the QB is/was the only factor. Which only proves that you're all out of your depth in this discussion. There's no point in even arguing with any of you.

Harder schedule + more wins = worse team. You argue this as you call others stupid...

You're too caught up in W/L. Go check out Peyton's Manning's W/L his rookie year. I bet some other rookies outperformed him in W/L that year, and certainly other years. So I guess that makes them superior to Manning in your world. Good to know.

He's one of the "Orton would've made it to the playoffs too" 7 percenters

Tony calling others dumb is just funny. Here is what he says after Tebow is 7-4 with a team that was 1-4 before he took over...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyR

I hate losing which is why I'm done with the Tebow experiment. He failed miserably the last two weeks. He came up really small on Sunday and got outplayed by Kyle Orton. Winning 7 of 8 got a lot of people thinking that Tebow played well but the reality is he never really played all that well other than some bursts here and there. That's not going to get it done in the NFL. You need your QB to be consistently good. I don't see any evidence that Tebow can be that guy. I was rooting for the kid too but reality has set in. You keep clinging to the mirage.

The winning QB is a failure because Tony likes winning. You can't make this stuff up...

You're too caught up in W/L. Go check out Peyton's Manning's W/L his rookie year. I bet some other rookies outperformed him in W/L that year, and certainly other years. So I guess that makes them superior to Manning in your world. Good to know.

Tony, one question. Would Kyle Orton have taken this team to the playoffs after starting 1-4?

You're too caught up in W/L. Go check out Peyton's Manning's W/L his rookie year. I bet some other rookies outperformed him in W/L that year, and certainly other years. So I guess that makes them superior to Manning in your world. Good to know.

What does Manning, or any QB, have to do with what I said? You are proving to be far too stupid for message boards again.